Bank of Ireland and Others v Domvile

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 08 December 1956
• Date: 08 December 1956
• Docket Number: (1952. No. 712)
• Court: High Court

Bank of Ireland and Others

and

Domvile

Estate in fee tail - Disentailing deeds - Protector of settlement a person of unsound mind - Consent not obtained - Base fee - Enlargement - Receipt of income of settled estate for over twelve years -Section 6 of Real Property Limitation Act, 1874 - Settled lands sold and partly represented by invested capital monies - Whether Real Property Limitation Act, 1874, s. 6, applied to invested capital monies - Settled Land Act, 1882, s. 22, sub-s. 5 - Disentailing deed - Non-execution by grantees - Doubt whether the grantee alive or dead at date of deed - Deed effective - Fines and Recoveries (Ireland) Act, 1894, s. 16.

Under and by virtue of three deeds of settlement three different estates, the S. M. and K. estates, were limited upon trust as to the K and S estates for C.M.D. for life in tail male in possession and as to the M estate as tenant in tail general in possession with remainder as to the three estates to M.D., in tail general. In 1885 C.M.D. was found to be a person of unsound mind. In 1886 M.D., married W.P. There was issue of the marriage one son, H.P., and one daughter, I.P. Prior to the marriage M.D.executed two disentailing deeds in respect of the estates in tail in remainder limited by the three deeds of settlement and thereby reserved to herself powers of appointment by deed or will in respect of the settled property. At the date of the execution of the said deeds of disentailment C.M.D. was the protector of the M and S estates and it was not possible for M.D. to obtain his consent as he was a person of unsound mind. The effect of these three disentailing deeds was decided by the Court in 1933 to be that as to the K estate M.D.became entitled to the fee simple but as to the S and the M estates she became entitled only to a fee simple defeasible on the failure of her own male issue or issue respectively. C.M.D.died in 1935 without having married and without his estates in tail having been enlarged. M.D. died in 1929 and by her will bequeathed all her property to her trustees upon trust for conversion and to stand possessed of the proceeds, in the events which happened, for her son and daughter, H.P. and I.P., in equal shares upon certain trusts under which each took at least a life estate From 1935 to 1952 the income from the settled estates had been paid to C.F., the receiver and committee of the estate of H.P. (who was a person of unsound mind) and he had applied the income equally between H.P. an...